DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Christians4LessGvt on July 05, 2008, 11:46:35 AM
-
(http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/2.0/global/nav/header/cnn_politics.gif)
Clinton supporters still not
embracing Obama, poll says
CNN, by Alexander Mooney - July 4, 2008
(CNN) One week after Hillary Clinton made a public show of unity with Barack Obama, a new survey suggests supporters of the New York senator are increasingly less likely to follow her lead.
A growing number of Clinton supporters say they may stay home in November instead of casting their ballot for Obama, a clear sign the party has yet to coalesce around the Illinois senator four weeks after the most prolonged and at times divisive primary race in modern American history came to a close.
According to a new survey from CNN and the Opinion Research Corporation, the number of Clinton supporters who plan to defect to John McCain's camp is down from one month ago, but in what could be an ominous sign for Obama as he seeks to unify the party, a growing number of them say they may not vote at all.
In a CNN/ORC survey conducted in early June, entirely before the New York senator officially ended her White House bid, 22 percent of Clinton supporters said they would not vote at all if Obama was the party's nominee. Now close to a third say they will stay home. In all, only 54 percent of Clinton backers say they plan on voting for Obama.
In another sign the wounds of the heated primary race have yet to heal, more than 4 in 10 registered Democrats (43 percent) still say they would prefer Clinton to be the party's presidential nominee. That number is significantly higher than it was in early June, when only 35 percent of Democrats said they preferred the New York senator to lead the party's presidential ticket Then, Obama won 59 percent of support from registered Democrats, now he garners 5 points less.
By nearly any measure then, it's clear Clinton supporters remain wary of supporting the man who beat her.
"These things always take time to heal," CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider said. "I think Clinton's supporters are waiting to see if Sen. Obama will pick her as vice president. That would certainly be very healing to them."
But most political observers agree the prospects of an Obama-Clinton ticket remain dim, most notably because the New York senator remains a divisive figure in American politics and Obama's message of change threatens to be muddled by the 16 years Clinton has spent in Washington
But the question remains whether Obama can win enough Democrats without Clinton as his No. 2.
"If he doesn't pick her, a later stage of grief is depression and then acceptance," Schneider said. "In the end I expect Clinton supporters will accept Obama, because they will listen to Sen. Clinton who has said the stakes are too high for Democrats to sulk."
In the end, maybe more than four weeks is needed for many of Clinton's most devoted supporters to move past her loss, especially considering the primary campaign stretched more than 17 months.
"Many voters find it tough to immediately switch allegiances to a candidate that they once opposed, so they find a 'neutral' setting more comfortable for awhile," CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said. "If that's what is happening to the Clinton supporters who now say they plan to stay at home, Obama may have nothing to worry about. If not, there's a big chunk of the party base that Obama won't be able to count on in November."
While Clinton's stock among many Democrats remains high in the latest CNN/ORC poll, her husband's is decidedly lower since a year ago at this time.
Much has been made of Bill Clinton's role over the course of his wife's White House bid ? the increasingly aggressive campaign style, the sharpened attacks leveled at Obama that some viewed as carrying racial overtones, and the outbursts at some reporters over what he viewed as unfair media coverage ? and the former president increasingly came under fire from neutral Democrats and party elders concerned he was fracturing the party in an election cycle during which Democrats appear to hold the advantage in nearly every way.
And the former president clearly left a sour taste in the minds of some Americans, among all registered voters his approval rating is down 9 points in just over a year (60 percent to 51 percent.)
"Former presidents are supposed to be above politics, but Bill Clinton couldn't be above it in this campaign since his wife was a candidate for president," Schneider said. "But he was seen as too political. Democrats thought it was appropriate for him to support his wife but not appropriate to get overly critical of Obama."
So can Clinton, who left office eight years ago with approval ratings well over 60 percent, repair his image with most Americans?
"He needs to show he's gotten over it," Schneider said.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/04/clinton-supporters-still-not-embracing-obama-poll-says/ (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/04/clinton-supporters-still-not-embracing-obama-poll-says/)
-
Obama should have coalesced the Democrat party by now. If Obama only receives 50% of the Hillary vote, McCain is going to sweep Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. This makes a pretty strong case that McCain should put either Romney or Tom Ridge on his ticket to ensure the White House.
-
So, ex-Clinton supporters may stay home as well as disgruntled evangelicals who won't vote for McCain. An interesting dilemma for sure. Obama should have accepted a VP role with Clinton as Prez and it would have been a more votable ticket. Some idiot might have capped Hillary and he would be Prez anyway or at least if that did not happen, he would have been in a perfect spot for future campaigns.
-
It is now time for Obama to make the move to the center where most votes are , but as he makes conservative noises he looses his base in the far left which was not consolidated on schedule two months ago.
So is gis choice to keep wooing the midle of the road Americans or to return to the far left to woo them?
Flip flopping is most irritateing when it is rapid.
-
I think CLinton would make a great vp for Obama. Besides, then she becomes a shoe-in for Prez in four years.
If McCain wins, she also a shoe-in.
She has a good set of pumps. 8)
-
I think CLinton would make a great vp for Obama. Besides, then she becomes a shoe-in for Prez in four years.
If McCain wins, she also a shoe-in.
She has a good set of pumps. 8)
Four years ,not eight?
-
I think CLinton would make a great vp for Obama. Besides, then she becomes a shoe-in for Prez in four years.
If McCain wins, she also a shoe-in.
She has a good set of pumps. 8)
Four years ,not eight?
LOL
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/memo-to-obama-moving-to-t_b_110026.html
the Obama campaign is making a very serious mistake. Tacking to the center is a losing strategy. And don't let the latest head-to-head poll numbers lull you the way they lulled Hillary Clinton in December.
................................................
Realpolitik is one thing. Realstupidpolitik is quite another.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa!
So who is watching the move and being fooled?
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barack-obama/my-position-on-fisa_b_110789.html
I want to take this opportunity to speak directly to those of you who oppose my decision to support the FISA compromise.
This was not an easy call for me.......
-Barack Obama
-
Flip flopping is most irritateing when it is rapid.
===============
Observe Obama is not saying "this instead of that"
Mostly, he is saying: "not only this, but that".
Other than his changing his mind about accepting donations in lieu of government money. And that he needs to do, because McSame will get a ton of support from Swiftboat types who will spend most of August and September saying that he is a Muslim who will start requiring every American to pay five times a day in the direction of Saudi Arabia.
Juniorbush & Puppetmeister Cheney already has us doing this, but with money instead of prayers, and only when we fill up our cars.
-
And that he needs to do, because McSame will get a ton of support from Swiftboat types who will spend most of August and September saying that he is a Muslim who will start requiring every American to pay five times a day in the direction of Saudi Arabia.
Virtually all remaining registered 527s support liberal agendas.
Or are you saying that liberals are gonna fill the airwaves with anti-Obama messages?
-
I am saying that Obama's deciding to outspend the GOP has probably prevented the GOP 527's from forming.
The number of 527's is irrelevant. It is the quantity of messages set out that is really important.
The GOP gets tons of money for the party to spend on whichever race it chooses. If it is obvious that Obama will outspend the fatcats no matter what the fatcats do, said fatcats will keep the money in their pockets and dedicate it to annoying lawsuits to keep Obama from making reforms when he is elected.
This is not the simplistic affair you want to make it out to be.
-
I am saying that Obama's deciding to outspend the GOP has probably prevented the GOP 527's from forming.
Most of them have been around for years. Most of the GOP 527s disbanded a few years ago when they were hit with massive fines. The Dem 527s just paid the fines and kept going.
And just because you make a claim does not automatically mean it is correct.
Dems have outspent Repubs every election for years. But please, remain blind to the facts.
-
Dems have nicer fat cats?
-
(http://crap.jinwicked.com/imgs/comics/20080221.jpg)
-
(http://crap.jinwicked.com/imgs/comics/20080221.jpg)
LOL
Obama is our only hope, as I see it.
He just has to chose Clinton as his running mate.
xxx'ing fingers.
-
And that would indeed be the cherry-on-top of just how bad his judgement really is
-
Hope should never be the sole province of the federal govt.
It should spring from within.
-
And that would indeed be the cherry-on-top of just how bad his judgement really is
I th9nk I can safely predict that no matter whom Obama chooses, sirs will find it totally wrong.
-
Wrong perhaps, but much better judgement likely
-
Wrong perhaps, but much better judgement likely
No, more like wrong, for sure. You have a narrow frame of mind, Sirs. I have noticed a lot of the right on this board share your lack of better judgement. . . common sense and we shall just see who wins in the next election. I pray it isn't someone who stands for what you seem to think is GOOD JUDGEMENT.
OY ::)
-
Hope should never be the sole province of the federal govt.
It should spring from within.
It's better to hope than to continue to support the current administration's policies which have done nothing but take away our "hope" as Americans.
-
And that would indeed be the cherry-on-top of just how bad his judgement really is
Sirs, his judgement so far has proven to me that he is a man who has more intelligence and the ability to run this country than Bush.
Why do you love Bush so much?
-
And that would indeed be the cherry-on-top of just how bad his judgement really is
Sirs, his judgement so far has proven to me that he is a man who has more intelligence and the ability to run this country than Bush.
Hmmm, dreadful personal associations
Politically expedient changes in positions
Rhetoric up the ying yang, and not a trace of pracical accomplishments to show for it
No effort, what-so-ever, of compromising with his political opponents
No definitive leadership roll or in running anything of substance. Was he at least a camp couselor once?
Yea, that's the next Political hero of our century
::)
Why do you love Bush so much?
Probably because I don't. Oh, and BTW, He's not running for anything
-
note date
(http://crap.jinwicked.com/imgs/comics/20061123.jpg)
-
It's better to hope than to continue to support the current administration's policies which have done nothing but take away our "hope" as Americans.
You obviously didn't understand the meaning of my post.
-
And that would indeed be the cherry-on-top of just how bad his judgement really is
Sirs, his judgement so far has proven to me that he is a man who has more intelligence and the ability to run this country than Bush.
Hmmm, dreadful personal associations
Politically expedient changes in positions
Rhetoric up the ying yang, and not a trace of pracical accomplishments to show for it
No effort, what-so-ever, of compromising with his political opponents
No definitive leadership roll or in running anything of substance. Was he at least a camp couselor once?
Yea, that's the next Political hero of our century
::)
Why do you love Bush so much?
Probably because I don't. Oh, and BTW, He's not running for anything
Probably because I don't. Oh, and BTW, He's not running for anything
No Kiddin :o really?? oh wow!
Sirs, you are silly.
Alrightie then,
Why do you admire the past president of the U.S.of A.? You accuse me of hating him. DO you have a positive thing to say about him?
You seem to think he's the man!
America's got news for you, Sirs.
HE's horrible.
-
And that would indeed be the cherry-on-top of just how bad his judgement really is
Sirs, his judgement so far has proven to me that he is a man who has more intelligence and the ability to run this country than Bush.
Hmmm, dreadful personal associations
Politically expedient changes in positions
Rhetoric up the ying yang, and not a trace of pracical accomplishments to show for it
No effort, what-so-ever, of compromising with his political opponents
No definitive leadership roll or in running anything of substance. Was he at least a camp couselor once?
Yea, that's the next Political hero of our century
::)
Why do you love Bush so much?
Probably because I don't. Oh, and BTW, He's not running for anything
Support your local slum lord.
-
Hmmm, dreadful personal associations
LOL....He has a world of wonderful personal associations.... In your opinion. But who and how are they keeping him from leading this country?
Politically expedient changes in positions
Oh, many politicians have been accused of that. Oh yes, the past president of our nation didn't change his position....HE WAS A LIAR. Bush was an idiot when he stood on the deck of the carrier declaring Mission Accomplished. Where are the WMD's that he claimed would be found?
Come on.... I am sure Bush at one point in his glorious leadership days... changed at least ONE position during his presidency.
Rhetoric up the ying yang, and not a trace of pracical accomplishments to show for it
.....in you biased, ignorant opinion. I say ignorant as a fact, not as an insult. For, you see, Sirs.....he accomplished becoming the Democratic candidate. That's A TRACE!!
No effort, what-so-ever, of compromising with his political opponents
NO Effort? Really how do you know this to be true? Why is that a reason not to elect him as a president?
Yea, that's the next Political hero of our century
Better Obama than what we've had for the past 8 years.
-
It's better to hope than to continue to support the current administration's policies which have done nothing but take away our "hope" as Americans.
You obviously didn't understand the meaning of my post.
Yes, I did, and
I hope you understand mine. ;D
You haven't understood the points that are critical in a lot of debates here unless your way is taken as the only way, BT.
Nope..not going to do it...not going to let you intimidate just because you are our leader. I respect you, I do, but you make a statement of not undertsanding and I could say the same thing with regard to my truth in any given matter.
Oh well, time to begin anew.
Politics changes....because politics is ABOUT change, isn't it?
"Should be's" don't always cut it in this sort of venue.
No exacts in Politics except the final numbers..and even those can be deceiving.
The essence of politics and the essence of a classroom setting---- similar.
Art AND science.....The art of understanding where people...human 'voters' are coming from.
more later, I am tired and off now.
See you all later when we reboot.
Ciao
-
Yes, I did, and
I hope you understand mine.
Yes your point is that you will vote for Obama because he isn't Bush.
Kerry tried that, didn't he? And he ran against the man.
-
Why do you love Bush so much?
Probably because I don't. Oh, and BTW, He's not running for anything
No Kiddin :o really?? oh wow! Sirs, you are silly. Alrightie then, Why do you admire the past president of the U.S.of A.? You accuse me of hating him. DO you have a positive thing to say about him?
You referring to Bush Jr? I admire him for putting credibility back with the U.S., for taking the fight to the enemy, vs waiting for them to hit us again here. There's not alot else I admire him on, outside of giving tax relief to everyone who payed taxes, and supporting a pair of great Judicial nominees, and to his credit, he tried to compromise, far too often with the Democrats, on policy and proposals. Otherwise, his Domestic spending (or lack of vetoing out-of-control congressional budgets) & Domestic policies, made Clinton look downright conservative. and don't even get me started on his preposterous "comprehensive immigration reform"
You seem to think he's the man! America's got news for you, Sirs. HE's horrible.
I'm sure alot of people thought Lincoln was as well. And no, I don't think he's "the man"
Hmmm, dreadful personal associations
LOL....He has a world of wonderful personal associations....
Yea, 1 racist pastor, 1 bigoted paster, 1 Domestic terrorist friend. Yea, real peaches of "wonderfulness"
But who and how are they keeping him from leading this country?
They again demonstrate how poor his judgement has been, all these many years, by maintaining these associations, associations I might add that would have had a GOP nominee completely tossed out of the running, LONG ago
Politically expedient changes in positions
Oh, many politicians have been accused of that. Oh yes, the past president of our nation didn't change his position....HE WAS A LIAR. Bush was an idiot when he stood on the deck of the carrier declaring Mission Accomplished. Where are the WMD's that he claimed would be found?
You really have gone off the democrat deep end, Cynthia. Naaaaa, you don't hate him. That whole diatribe above is right out of MoveOn. But hey, if you want to join Tee in fantasyland, I'm sure he can use the company
Come on.... I am sure Bush at one point in his glorious leadership days... changed at least ONE position during his presidency.
Cynthia, you're not paying attention. A) this isn't about Bush, as he's not running, this is about Obama. B) Obama's whole mantle is how supposedly fresh and new his politics are supposed to be, yet when all is said and done, he's just the same old tired politician DC keeps spitting out election cycle after election cycle.
Take this under consideration, Obama's flip flops now, if he had done them prior to all the primaries, would have had him stuffed & mounted by Hillary. McCain's flip flops changed nothing. He'd still be the GOP nominee
Rhetoric up the ying yang, and not a trace of pracical accomplishments to show for it
.....in you biased, ignorant opinion. I say ignorant as a fact, not as an insult. For, you see, Sirs.....he accomplished becoming the Democratic candidate. That's A TRACE!!
LOL......yea, that's really substantive. Couldn't refute it could you ::) I hope that koolaide has alot of ice in it
No effort, what-so-ever, of compromising with his political opponents
NO Effort? Really how do you know this to be true?
LOL...BECAUSE HE HAS A SENATE RECORD, THAT DEMONSTRATES PRECISELY THAT
Why is that a reason not to elect him as a president?
It's not, it's simply a point of FACT
Yea, that's the next Political hero of our century
Better Obama than what we've had for the past 8 years.
And yet again, Bush seems to be the current nominee in Cynthia's world
-
You referring to Bush Jr? I admire him for putting credibility back with the U.S., for taking the fight to the enemy, vs waiting for them to hit us again here. There's not alot else I admire him on, outside of giving tax relief to everyone who payed taxes, and supporting a pair of great Judicial nominees, and to his credit, he tried to compromise, far too often with the Democrats, on policy and proposals. Otherwise, his Domestic spending (or lack of vetoing out-of-control congressional budgets) & Domestic policies, made Clinton look downright conservative. and don't even get me started on his preposterous "comprehensive immigration reform"
Not A lot? Sorry to hear that. You seem so dedicated to Bjr.
-
"I'm sure alot of people thought Lincoln was as well. And no, I don't think he's "the man""
Once again....a lot?
-
It's not, it's simply a point of FACT
Oh really?
How so?
-
Yes, I did, and
I hope you understand mine.
Yes your point is that you will vote for Obama because he isn't Bush.
Kerry tried that, didn't he? And he ran against the man.
Bt,
Why should anyone vote for McCain?
-
Not A lot? Sorry to hear that. You seem so dedicated to Bjr.
Then, again, you're not paying attention
"I'm sure alot of people thought Lincoln was (horrible) as well. And no, I don't think he's "the man""
Once again....a lot?
Yea...most of the south I do believe, and probably alot of families who lost all their men during the civil war. They too probably didn't take kindly to Lincoln taking us to war....with ourselves
It's not, it's simply a point of FACT (that Obama's senate record clearly provides anyone with a shred of objectivity on this matter) ample repetition that at no time has he authored any bill with bipartsian support, nor has voted with the GOP on anything, that the Dems did not want)
Oh really? How so?
How SOOOO? Good gravy, Cynthia, and you call me ignorant
Bt, Why should anyone vote for McCain?
He's not, Bush. I hear that's the main rationale for voting Obama
-
Bt,
Why should anyone vote for McCain?
Because they agree with his positions and believe he is the better of the two major candidates on issues that matter to them.
Why do you vote for a candidate?
-
Because they agree with his positions and believe he is the better of the two major candidates on issues that matter to them.
Why do you vote for a candidate?
Because I agree with his/her positions and believe he/she is the better of the two major candidates on issues that matter to me.
But it's not that simple. There are issues like taxing the rich(which needs to change, imo) education reform; war; health care.
Those issues are important to me. But, I have a feeling that once a candidate is elected into office, ideals and promises go through a sudden "oops factor" change.
Can one really trust any politician anymore?
I like what Obama has to say. I feel for the folks who have little or no access to a decent health care system.
But, then again, I do not want to be overly taxed.
-
I can't remember what the tax rate was during the years our economy was going really well, but I think it was something like 95%.
That's what paid for the GI Bill.
And the highway system, and so on.
-
What are you smoking, Lanya? IIRC, that tax rate was occuring during the World War years. During the Carter years I believe it was "only", 70% when our econmomy was in an absolute abyss, inflation running rampant, and we even had a "misery index", measuing how supposedly miserable everyone was. The economy didn't rebound until a few years after Reagan passed massive tax relief for everyone that payed taxes. THEN our economy took a powerful upswing, hampered only by DC's continued wreckless out of control spending
-
I can't remember what the tax rate was during the years our economy was going really well, but I think it was something like 95%.
That's what paid for the GI Bill.
And the highway system, and so on.
History of top rates
- In 1913 the tax rate was 1% on taxable net income above $3,000 ($4,000 for married couples), less deductions and exemptions. It rose to a rate of 7% on incomes above $500,000.
- During World War I the top rate rose to 77%; after the war, the top rate was scaled down to a low of 25%.
- During the Great Depression and World War II, the top income tax rate rose again. In the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, the top rate was 75%. The top rate reached 94% during the war and remained at 91% until 1964.
- In 1964 the top rate was decreased to 70% (1964 Revenue Act), then to 50% in 1981 (Economic Recovery Tax Act or ERTA).
- The Tax Reform Act of 1986 reduced the top rate to 28%, at the same time raising the bottom rate from 11% to 15% (in fact 15% and 28% became the only two tax brackets).
- During the 1990s the top rate rose again, standing at 39.6% by the end of the decade.
- The top rate was cut to 35% and the bottom rate was cut to 10% by the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#History_of_top_rates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#History_of_top_rates)
-
Because I agree with his/her positions and believe he/she is the better of the two major candidates on issues that matter to me.
At this point neither of the presumed nominees are female so i don't see the need for the he/she conditional.
But it's not that simple. There are issues like taxing the rich(which needs to change, imo) education reform; war; health care.Those issues are important to me. But, I have a feeling that once a candidate is elected into office, ideals and promises go through a sudden "oops factor" change.
Actually it is that simple. If candidate A is more in line with your priorities vote for him.
Can one really trust any politician anymore?
Maybe not. Then again you don't have to set yourself up to be at the mercy of them either.
I like what Obama has to say. I feel for the folks who have little or no access to a decent health care system.
But, then again, I do not want to be overly taxed.
Then i suggest you carefully consider your vote.
-
Not A lot? Sorry to hear that. You seem so dedicated to Bjr.
Then, again, you're not paying attention
"I'm sure alot of people thought Lincoln was (horrible) as well. And no, I don't think he's "the man""
Once again....a lot?
Yea...most of the south I do believe, and probably alot of families who lost all their men during the civil war. They too probably didn't take kindly to Lincoln taking us to war....with ourselves
It's not, it's simply a point of FACT (that Obama's senate record clearly provides anyone with a shred of objectivity on this matter) ample repetition that at no time has he authored any bill with bipartsian support, nor has voted with the GOP on anything, that the Dems did not want)
Oh really? How so?
How SOOOO? Good gravy, Cynthia, and you call me ignorant
Bt, Why should anyone vote for McCain?
He's not, Bush. I hear that's the main rationale for voting Obama
It's not, it's simply a point of FACT (that Obama's senate record clearly provides anyone with a shred of objectivity on this matter) ample repetition that at no time has he authored any bill with bipartsian support, nor has voted with the GOP on anything, that the Dems did not want)
Who's fact? Yours?
I have yet to see you post facts on a thread. You side step the issue.
Show ME facts, please..and where you got them.
I can not believe that you are that arrogant to assume that because YOU STATE it as fact, that it is.
I am open to reading any facts on this matter...Ami? Bt?
-
Why do you vote for a candidate?
BT...with all due respect. This question did not ask specifically a particular "office".
I see nothing wrong with referring to both genders with regard to your particular question, here.
You did not ask me why do I vote for the current presidential candidates who are CURRENTLY RUNNING.
-
Because I agree with his/her positions and believe he/she is the better of the two major candidates on issues that matter to me.
At this point neither of the presumed nominees are female so i don't see the need for the he/she conditional.
But it's not that simple. There are issues like taxing the rich(which needs to change, imo) education reform; war; health care.Those issues are important to me. But, I have a feeling that once a candidate is elected into office, ideals and promises go through a sudden "oops factor" change.
Actually it is that simple. If candidate A is more in line with your priorities vote for him.
Can one really trust any politician anymore?
Maybe not. Then again you don't have to set yourself up to be at the mercy of them either.
I like what Obama has to say. I feel for the folks who have little or no access to a decent health care system.
But, then again, I do not want to be overly taxed.
Then i suggest you carefully consider your vote.
Which is what I am carefully considering as we speak. You see I have passionate concerns about the educational system, and Kennedy was the original creater of the NCLB act.(liberal) I like Obama for the very reason that he is listening to the public school teachers and the issues we face.
But, do I want tax and spend liberal in office? NO.
-
It's not, it's simply a point of FACT (that Obama's senate record clearly provides anyone with a shred of objectivity on this matter) ample repetition that at no time has he authored any bill with bipartsian support,
He and Tom Coburn (R-OK) authored an ethics reform bill. The bill passed with bipartisan support.
-
Good catch Ami. I think the point still remains (in which Cynthia is again demanding I prove a negative), that Obama votes lock step with the Dems on all issues the Dems want & support, and at no time has he voted against his party's interests, as opposed to McCain, having done it numerous times.
Cynthia apparently wants a listing of all the votes that shows how he has voted with the Dems 99.9% of the time. I suppose after doing some extensive legislative research, I could post all these votes......which will not have changed Cynthia's perception of Obama in the slightest. What would be far simpler is that she post just 1 vote where he voted with the GOP and against the Dems on a particular piece of Legislation, analogus to what McCain has done
Just 1
-
Good catch Ami. I think the point still remains (in which Cynthia is again demanding I prove a negative), that Obama votes lock step with the Dems on all issues the Dems want & support, and at no time has he voted against his party's interests, as opposed to McCain, having done it numerous times.
Cynthia apparently wants a listing of all the votes that shows how he has voted with the Dems 99.9% of the time. I suppose after doing some extensive legislative research, I could post all these votes......which will not have changed Cynthia's perception of Obama in the slightest. What would be far simpler is that she post just 1 vote where he voted with the GOP and against the Dems on a particular piece of Legislation, analogus to what McCain has done
Just 1
Sirs,
Ami made my point. You can't post facts for your life!
;)
That's all I was asking for ...FROM YOU>
d'oh
-
And yet not 1 example of Obama working with Republicans, against his party's interest. Did I mention, not 1?
Thanks for making my point
-
"Cynthia apparently wants a listing of all the votes that shows how he has voted with the Dems 99.9% of the time. I suppose after doing some extensive legislative research, I could post all these votes......which will not have changed Cynthia's perception of Obama in the slightest. What would be far simpler is that she post just 1 vote where he voted with the GOP and against the Dems on a particular piece of Legislation, analogus to what McCain has done"
Nope...didn't ask for a list of all votes.
Nope ....you may just have changed my mind on Obama...IF you could have posted such votes etc.
Nope....what would be far simpler is that you post something for once to back up your claims...instead of waiting for Ami and BT to rescue your butt.
side bar comment:
I never called you ignorant, btw. I was stating a fact. . . not name calling.
When it comes to teaching in the public schools, you are ignorant of what goes on in the classroom.
-
And yet not 1 example of Obama working with Republicans, against his party's interest. Did I mention, not 1?
Thanks for making my point
You can thank Ami for bring in that point, Sirs. Not you.
-
"Cynthia apparently wants a listing of all the votes that shows how he has voted with the Dems 99.9% of the time. I suppose after doing some extensive legislative research, I could post all these votes......which will not have changed Cynthia's perception of Obama in the slightest. What would be far simpler is that she post just 1 vote where he voted with the GOP and against the Dems on a particular piece of Legislation, analogus to what McCain has done"
Nope...didn't ask for a list of all votes.
That's precisely my point, 99.9% of all his votes cast were for Democrat proposals, or legislation that both parties supported. My "facts" would require the posting of all those votes. What you're seeking is some example where that's not the case. I'm not going to look for that for you. that'd be your job
Nope ....you may just have changed my mind on Obama...IF you could have posted such votes etc.
Ahh, in that case, I'll take that time....being that you're on record as indicating such an acute lack of trying to work with Republicans, would have you to seriously consider changing your vote. So, when I get home, and look up his legisaltive record, and after you've seen it, you'll be much more inclined in changing your mind, correct?
Nope....what would be far simpler is that you post something for once to back up your claims...instead of waiting for Ami and BT to rescue your butt.
I've never needed or required anyone to "save my butt". If you had been paying attention, what Ami posted wasn't anything i was referencing or what you were requesting from me, and was actually more supportive of some bipartisan effort on his part......IF you had been paying attention. And we won't even go into the request after request after request of you supporting the claim how NCLB mandates teaching to the test, and multiple tests, and your acute inability of providing such. All you could provide was your position as a teacher, and somehow that was all that was necessary.....your word as a teacher
side bar comment: I never called you ignorant, btw. I was stating a fact. . . not name calling.
Your "stating of fact" of my ignorance, pretty much equates to name calling, I'm afraid to say
When it comes to teaching in the public schools, you are ignorant of what goes on in the classroom.
And when it comes to issues on the War, on Iraq, and on the military, you are apparently just as ignorant
-
Your "stating of fact" of my ignorance, pretty much equates to name calling, I'm afraid to say.
No, it is not. It's a matter of knowledge. Either one is ignorant of certain things based on lack of knowledge or they aren't. Ignorance is bliss, as they say.
I never tried to make fun of you...unlike you constantly throwing darts my way...instead of just posting the facts as you KNOW them.
-
It's not, it's simply a point of FACT (that Obama's senate record clearly provides anyone with a shred of objectivity on this matter) ample repetition that at no time has he authored any bill with bipartsian support,
He and Tom Coburn (R-OK) authored an ethics reform bill. The bill passed with bipartisan support.
I trust you have proof of that statement. ;)
-
Still trying to misdirect & mischaracterize, I see. Let's redirect then.....If I manage to show a posting of all these votes by Obama that show no effort what-so ever of going against hiw own party's interests, and you'll be seriously considering changing your vote, correct?
-
Still trying to misdirect & mischaracterize, I see. Let's redirect then.....If I manage to show a posting of all these votes by Obama that show no effort what-so ever of going against hiw own party's interests, and you'll be seriously considering changing your vote, correct?
Now now....Sirs.....if you read back your own posts, you redirect all the damn time! sheesh..you set a person up as not being "ok" and then you go for the kill. But you miss every time. Instead we are left with accusations and no real meat.
Lanya....what were you smoking, dear?
Afterall, Sirs set that post up in favor of himself by making such, albeit silly, accusations.
Is that how you win points?
::)
-
Let's redirect 1 more time.....If I manage to show a posting of all these votes by Obama that show no effort what-so ever of going against his own party's interests, and you'll be seriously considering changing your vote, correct?
-
Still trying to misdirect & mischaracterize, I see. Let's redirect then.....If I manage to show a posting of all these votes by Obama that show no effort what-so ever of going against hiw own party's interests, and you'll be seriously considering changing your vote, correct?
oh and btw, since you asked...and since I am not one to duck from facts and how they hold truth and water for me, yes, I would reconsider.
Like I told Bt earlier...although we differ seriously on the ramifications, implications, the down right mandates of the NCLB act. I see the act as having 'its' hands in more than is apparent to either BT or Ami ------especially,after hearing from so many many people -including politicians. \\BUT if I see that the scales tip in the direction against Obama in terms of other issues, then I might have to reconsider voting for him.
Remember, I never professed to be an expert on here, Sirs. You have known that about my for years. I am ignorant of many facts in the political system. That's why I enjoy the gate....to learn and ....as of recent to post my own passionate thoughts on a given subject. But, yes I am flexible. My ego is not that fragile as one might think. I like to hear the details and the points put forth on many a topic.
I doubt very very seriously, from the tone of thread/post from many members here, that they could be able to do the same without having to "hide face' in order to "save face"
(just a thought)
Ami is still one of the posters I can rely on as he does NOT ATTACK. I have never attacked in the way you do, unless I am attacked first, SIrs.
That's an attack fact! ;)
-
1 last time, otherwise I'm moving on.....Let's redirect.....If I manage to show a posting of all these votes by Obama that show no effort what-so ever of going against his own party's interests, and you'll be seriously considering changing your vote, correct?
-
Found that .1%. Way down at the bottom, 1 item where he voted with the GOP, against the Dems. The other 99% has been with the Dems.
Major Voting Issues (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/key-votes/)
So, does that help sway Cynthia's notion that obama supposedly works better with Republicans than McCain does with Democrats? Slight change in who's she's gonna vote for now?
-
1 last time, otherwise I'm moving on.....Let's redirect.....If I manage to show a posting of all these votes by Obama that show no effort what-so ever of going against his own party's interests, and you'll be seriously considering changing your vote, correct?
With you arrogance, I can't say that I would really ever listen to you, Sirs. You have an arrogant way about you, dear. With all due respect.
LOL
I will change my vote because I was raised a Rep. but I am also a free thinker, and if I find that there is damn good reason to change my vote, of course I will. Didn't you read my post?
ONE last time, Sirs......move the hell on!
You are frankly not someone I care to read anymore. But, then again, I feel for you...as you are sensitive, as a lot of good folks are.....so...hell, who knows, maybe someday you will share a decent fact or two.
I expected more from you, Sirs. But, we all have our set backs.
Post like you've never posted before without ONE reference TO ME as an individual...See if you can do that~
-
Found that .1%. Way down at the bottom, 1 item where he voted with the GOP, against the Dems. The other 99% has been with the Dems.
Major Voting Issues (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/key-votes/)
So, does that help sway Cynthia's notion that obama supposedly works better with Republicans than McCain does with Democrats? Slight change in who's she's gonna vote for now?
Not really, no more than the points sent in your direction in the reality of what is happening in the classrooms in the public schools. You probably will never convince me, unless you see that the children in the PS's, who are undergoing a one size fits all curriculum because the GOV. SAID IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO, deserve MORE.. When did the government decided EVERYTHING in the arena of education? EVERYTHING. I have a friend who is a professor of the COLLEGE OF SANTA FE...and he is outraged at how the system has been hi-jacked. Why bother educating the young people today if the government is going to mandate everything we do in the average classroom.....and the POWERS THAT BE (GOVERNMENT off eds) aren't even teachers....
BUt, at least Obama hears us, Sirs. My god he hears our life pure and simple.
So, are YOU willing to listen and CHANGE YOUR MIND becuase I*** say it's right?
Geezz...You can quote, provide facts until your cow comes home, but until you have shown me facts that mean something, instead of diving into the bottom of your barrel to find it.....no, it's not going to make a dent in my view.
If, however, we were civil on this board and you were someone I trusted to provide informative information with regard to what the candidates are doing, and what will help the average American....tit for tat....with a sense of true argument...NOT DEBAte NECESSARILY....but a true fact to fact discussion...I might listen to you here...
BT is, actually one who has "tried" to stretch the debate in that direction.....he might be a bit sarcastic, as we all are...I agree, but I want to be able to provide videos, information and such without BEING LAUGHED AT BY YOU!
You are boring me. You have little to provide in a way of rich discussions.
But, I am willing to be open minded if you are willing to stop your arrogant BS.
-
BUt, at least Obama hears us, Sirs. My god he hears our life pure and simple.
Is that why he sends his kids to private school and has since he was a state senator?
-
Found that .1%. Way down at the bottom, 1 item where he voted with the GOP, against the Dems. The other 99% has been with the Dems.
Major Voting Issues (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/key-votes/)
So, does that help sway Cynthia's notion that obama supposedly works better with Republicans than McCain does with Democrats? Slight change in who's she's gonna vote for now?
Not really, no more than the points sent in your direction in the reality of what is happening in the classrooms in the public schools.
That's kinda what I thought you'd say. :-\
-
BUt, at least Obama hears us, Sirs. My god he hears our life pure and simple.
Is that why he sends his kids to private school and has since he was a state senator?
Once again, BT...Obama not only recognizes what is really happening within the public school arena, from what I've heard first hand on those videos and in type, he is also willing to help solve those issues.
That's what counts.
-
Once again, BT...Obama not only recognizes what is really happening within the public school arena, from what I've heard first hand on those videos and in type, he is also willing to help solve those issues.
That's what counts.
What counts is that he must not only talk the talk, he must walk the walk.
He sends his kids to private schools. That isn't walking the walk.
No records of him serving on any education committees at either the state or federal level.
Sounds more like he is preaching to the choir, telling you what you want to hear.
And that's ok if that's what you want.
-
Found that .1%. Way down at the bottom, 1 item where he voted with the GOP, against the Dems. The other 99% has been with the Dems.
Major Voting Issues (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/key-votes/)
So, does that help sway Cynthia's notion that obama supposedly works better with Republicans than McCain does with Democrats? Slight change in who's she's gonna vote for now?
Not really, no more than the points sent in your direction in the reality of what is happening in the classrooms in the public schools.
That's kinda what I thought you'd say. :-\
Truth is truth.
Now keep posting those facts, ok?
Money seems to be at the heart of much that is politics, unfortunately. Morals, rights, common sense, respect be darned. :( sadly
Education takes a back stage, as well, unfortunately. Public education is a right and should be respected as such. There are brilliant professionals who have taken on the position to educate ALL. When did the education of all become for the wealthy, only?
It started in the early 20th century. The rich were given the best practices then and still do today. Obama is a political figure. He can not send his child to a public school. So is he an elitist? Not really. He is a realist. But that does not take away from the reality that most of the nation of young children are not the sons or daugthers of the very high profile rich.
So, I continue to work with children...front lines... but the public school is still a 'right'.
All kids deserve more.....they deserve what they used to get before NCLB.
Obama hears that clearly..., more than any other candidate to date.
If you were capable of witnessing the average PS classroom, you would see that the torture is beyond belief.
The over testing and the mandates that are "somehow" a link to the NCLB act....are obscene.
-
Once again, BT...Obama not only recognizes what is really happening within the public school arena, from what I've heard first hand on those videos and in type, he is also willing to help solve those issues.
That's what counts.
What counts is that he must not only talk the talk, he must walk the walk.
He sends his kids to private schools. That isn't walking the walk.
No records of him serving on any education committees at either the state or federal level.
Sounds more like he is preaching to the choir, telling you what you want to hear.
And that's ok if that's what you want.
I wouldn't expect any president to send their child to private school. Your point is skirting the issue, BT. come on.
I just posted to this.
Nite.
-
I wouldn't expect any president to send their child to private school. Your point is skirting the issue, BT. come on.
Obama isn't a President. He was sending his kids to private schools when he was a state senator.
I really don't see how you can expect him to save public schools when he doesn't trust them enough to send his own kids to them.
And that is the issue with Obama and public school quality.
-
Found that .1% Way down at the bottom, 1 item where he voted with the GOP, against the Dems. The other 99% has been with the Dems.
Major Voting Issues (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/key-votes/)
So, does that help sway Cynthia's notion that obama supposedly works better with Republicans than McCain does with Democrats? Slight change in who's she's gonna vote for now?
Not really.....
That's kinda what I thought you'd say :-\
Truth is truth.
From your biased perspective perhaps. Point remains unchecked. You claimed that if such demonstration of Obama's factual lack of working with Republicans and support of largely anything & everything Democrats wanted was presented, you'd seriously have to reconsider your support for him. I was skeptical, but presented those facts (not MY facts, but the Senate's facts, and Obama's facts). And you didn't disappoint unfortunately and validated the skepticism, with the "not really...."
Now keep posting those facts, ok?
Okie dokie, not that it's make any difference, as you've clearly demonstrated
-
I wouldn't expect any president to send their child to private school. Your point is skirting the issue, BT. come on.
Obama isn't a President. He was sending his kids to private schools when he was a state senator.
I really don't see how you can expect him to save public schools when he doesn't trust them enough to send his own kids to them.
And that is the issue with Obama and public school quality.
I know he's not president......yet, ..I was wishfully hoping when I typed that statement and I knew you would point that out to me ;)
BT, how do you know for a fact that Obama does not trust the public schools? Show me the clip, statement, please---- that states exactly those words..."I don't trust the public schools".
I can 'expect' Obama to walk his talk ( such as was heard on the youtube videos) if/when he is elected president.
-
Found that .1% Way down at the bottom, 1 item where he voted with the GOP, against the Dems. The other 99% has been with the Dems.
Major Voting Issues (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/key-votes/)
So, does that help sway Cynthia's notion that obama supposedly works better with Republicans than McCain does with Democrats? Slight change in who's she's gonna vote for now?
Not really.....
That's kinda what I thought you'd say :-\
Truth is truth.
From your biased perspective perhaps. Point remains unchecked. You claimed that if such demonstration of Obama's factual lack of working with Republicans and support of largely anything & everything Democrats wanted was presented, you'd seriously have to reconsider your support for him. I was skeptical, but presented those facts (not MY facts, but the Senate's facts, and Obama's facts). And you didn't disappoint unfortunately and validated the skepticism, with the "not really...."
Now keep posting those facts, ok?
Okie dokie, not that it's make any difference, as you've clearly demonstrated
Okie dokie, not that it's make any difference, as you've clearly demonstrated
No, actually it will make a difference to read that you have more facts behind your claims, Sirs. I expect more from you because I trust you, ironically. You can bring more to the table in terms of a good debate if you google a bit more instead of bringing the discussion into a personal tit for tat.
It only makes me want to tat for tit back at ya.... ;)
-
Now keep posting those facts, ok?
Okie dokie, not that it's make any difference, as you've clearly demonstrated
Okie dokie, not that it's make any difference, as you've clearly demonstrated
No, actually it will make a difference to read that you have more facts behind your claims, Sirs.
Which were then provided, which facilitated a response of "not really" to any changing of the mind, when you had earlier postulated such a probability. Bascially validating what I presumed you'd respond with.
So, what you're doing now is redirecting your aggravation of me reinforcing Obama's piss poor efforts at working with the GOP, against his party's wishes (analogus to what McCain has accomplished) at me instead of Obama, thus clearing your conscience so you can go back to singing his praises as the next greatest thing since sliced bread
-
BT, how do you know for a fact that Obama does not trust the public schools? Show me the clip, statement, please---- that states exactly those words..."I don't trust the public schools".
Why would Obama send his kids to private schools if he felt that public schools were up to the task? Hell, the governor of my state (a Dem) sends her kids to public schools.
As BT pointed out, a person has a lot more credibility when the walk the walk.
-
BT, how do you know for a fact that Obama does not trust the public schools? Show me the clip, statement, please---- that states exactly those words..."I don't trust the public schools".
Why would Obama send his kids to private schools if he felt that public schools were up to the task? Hell, the governor of my state (a Dem) sends her kids to public schools.
As BT pointed out, a person has a lot more credibility when the walk the walk.
I find that argument so weak. Walking the talk. When there are so many issues at hand in the system that need revised. Credibility comes from action- direct action to the problem/issue at hand. We will have to wait and judge his or McCains credibility after the election. For now, I chose to trust, based on the spot on "points" Obama has made with regard to the problems in the ps arena.
-
Does anyone seriously believe that McCain would send his kids to DC public schools, if he actually had any to send?
-
Does anyone seriously believe that McCain would send his kids to DC public schools, if he actually had any to send?
I don't think that anyone has said that McCain trusts public schools.
-
Does anyone seriously believe that McCain would send his kids to DC public schools, if he actually had any to send?
Which of course, the precise same query could be applied to Obama, and he does have kids......and chose NOT to send them to Public School
Speaks volumes on the "action" front, which is what Cynthis is apparently demanding
-
I find that argument so weak.
I find your counter argument weaker.
Let's not examine his history vis a vis public schools.
Let's not look at his track record.
Let's just listen to his "spot" on remarks ( many of his statements have already been debunked) and choose to believe.
"All you need is trust and a little bit of pixie dust!" - Peter Pan
-
I wonder how Senator Obama feels about proposals for a voucher system?
If he prefers priviate schools why shouldn't we all?
Must good educxation be a reservation of the rich and all the rest of us hav the right to a minimum?
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ridley/liberal-fear-of-a-black-p_b_112211.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ridley/liberal-fear-of-a-black-p_b_112211.html)
Moreover, what scares the Old Schoolers is that Obama's potential election removes from them the victim stick with which they flog their diminishing relevance.
-
I wonder how Senator Obama feels about proposals for a voucher system?
If he prefers priviate schools why shouldn't we all?
Must good educxation be a reservation of the rich and all the rest of us hav the right to a minimum?
=============================================
The best education will ALWAYS be more available to the rich, as will the bets of everything else. The solution is to do something to provide everyone with a decent income for the work they do.
This is why Sweden, Denmark, Japan, Taiwan, the Netherlands and several other nations are ahead of us in the number of scientists, engineers and other professionals: because they have more equitable incomes spread more equally among their people. After the first $300,000 or so one earns for year, there is nothing else that you can spend it on to live a more comfortable life.
The minimal acceptable education can still be adequate to the needs of the country and it's people, even though it does not seem to be now.
Part of the problem is the serious anti-intellectual attitude of the culture. Rapsters, musicians, actors and pro jocks are accorded far more respect than their talents or value to society merit.
-
I wonder how Senator Obama feels about proposals for a voucher system?
If he prefers priviate schools why shouldn't we all?
Must good educxation be a reservation of the rich and all the rest of us hav the right to a minimum?
=============================================
The best education will ALWAYS be more available to the rich, as will the bets of everything else. The solution is to do something to provide everyone with a decent income for the work they do.
This is why Sweden, Denmark, Japan, Taiwan, the Netherlands and several other nations are ahead of us in the number of scientists, engineers and other professionals: because they have more equitable incomes spread more equally among their people. After the first $300,000 or so one earns for year, there is nothing else that you can spend it on to live a more comfortable life.
The minimal acceptable education can still be adequate to the needs of the country and it's people, even though it does not seem to be now.
Part of the problem is the serious anti-intellectual attitude of the culture. Rapsters, musicians, actors and pro jocks are accorded far more respect than their talents or value to society merit.
Where I work we have a big bunch of engineers, half of them are imported.
Is this one sided? are a lot of well educated Americans heading overseas for work?
-
Where I work we have a big bunch of engineers, half of them are imported.
Is this one sided? are a lot of well educated Americans heading overseas for work?
===========================================================
There are undoubtably some US engineers at work abroad. But there are far more foreign-born engineers in the US than vice-versa. Americans are not fond, it seems, of math and science to the same degree that students are in other nations. An MBA is a much easier degree to earn, and it generally places one closer to the money than an engineering degree normally does. Engineers do not normally run US companies, not even usually do they run engineering companies.
In education, this is similar to the phenomena that a vice principal is paid more than most teachers, even though a vice principal normally deals with students only one to perhaps a few at a time, and the teacher must normally deal with the entire class.
It is a pretty good description of one of the more serious defects in the American system.
There is more emphasis placed on winning a ball game in most US high schools than in winning the science fair prize.
We have no shortage at all of excellent fodder for pro sports. It would be better, however, if we recognized the need for engineers, scientists, and mathematicians as well as great teachers more.